I want to respond to my own comments. As I had an very early HI-Z antenna
system. I understand from Lee that there is a remedy for BCI now. So my
comment should really have stated that "in general Voltage Probe antennas
with naked gain stages can suffer from BCB IMD." Thanks to Lee for
pointing this out to me.
Regards to the group.
Jay, WX0B
Jay Terleski
Array Solutions
214 954 7140
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:13 PM Jay Terleski <jayt@arraysolutions.com>
wrote:
> The SAL-30 will be fine in a forested plot.
> Nothing unstabel with the pattern or performance as it is a very mature
> deisgn that does not push the paramaters of the preamp. The nice thing
> about it is it also forms the pattern before any gain stages so there is no
> mixing or IMD of AM or SW broadcast. My HI-Z Four Square always had high
> IMD and birdies from the local AM stations here in DFW. The SAL has a
> built in AM BCB high pass filter too before the preamp. As the magic T
> combiner gives it a stable impedance. So it routes the already pattern
> formed signal through the filter then to the preamp stage. So it is a very
> quiet antenna.. Worked all the low band DX pedtitions with it and did very
> well in the ARRL DX.
>
> Regards,
> Jay
>
> Jay Terleski
> Array Solutions
> 214 954 7140
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 11:00 AM <topband-request@contesting.com> wrote:
>
>> Send Topband mailing list submissions to
>> topband@contesting.com
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> topband-request@contesting.com
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> topband-owner@contesting.com
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest (Mike Fischer)
>> 2. Re: ARRL DX Contest (Gary Smith)
>> 3. Re: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest (Mpridesti)
>> 4. HQ9X 160/80/60m (Dennis Egan)
>> 5. Fwd: HQ9X 160/80/60m CORRECTION (Dennis Egan)
>> 6. 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest (Lee STRAHAN)
>> 7. Re: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest (John Kaufmann)
>> 8. Re: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest (Joe Subich, W4TV)
>> 9. Re: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest (Lee STRAHAN)
>> 10. Re: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest (cqtestk4xs@aol.com)
>> 11. Re: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest (John Harden, D.M.D.)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 11:56:03 -0800
>> From: Mike Fischer <mikebfischer@comcast.net>
>> To: topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Topband: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest
>> Message-ID: <0CC640CE-2FB4-4FBA-A92C-D5EA66DD0266@comcast.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>
>> Hi all, newb to the topband 160 reflector here so thank you for any
>> coaching or corrections on protocol?
>>
>> I live on a heavily forested (douglas firs - almost all of which are
>> 100?+) piece of land.
>>
>> I have enough room left to put up either an SAL 30 or a 4sq of 20? verts
>> with 80? spacing. HiZ probably
>>
>> Problem is regardless of which I choose, there will be at least one or
>> two trees in the ?infield? and foliage around the edges.
>>
>> Any experience with the same or thoughts? Grateful for the coaching
>> please feel free to reply direct to mikebfischer@comcast.net
>>
>> 73
>> K7XH
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 14:59:31 -0500
>> From: "Gary Smith" <Gary@ka1j.com>
>> To: Topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL DX Contest
>> Message-ID: <5C6B0EA3.16747.5D5BEED@Gary.ka1j.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>>
>> Fun conditions but I had un-avoidable
>> obligations that kept me from any sincere
>> contest effort, I just got on to give
>> points. Didn't take part in any pileups,
>> just answered CQ's with nobody else
>> calling them.
>>
>> As others have mentioned, Saturday was
>> much better and I was amazed how EU was
>> killing it over here. There were some of
>> the strongest 160 signals in, for me,
>> quite a few years. I only worked 160, this
>> is the band with the most reward, for me.
>>
>> Kudos to the HI-Z antennas for a real help
>> on some of the weaker stations. Just for
>> fun I tried the sloper alone for RX and
>> intelligibility plummeted. Used the sloper
>> and triangular on the sub Rx, for
>> diversity with the K3s and that was a
>> marked improvement. The circle 8 &
>> triangular for diversity was a real window
>> cleaning.
>>
>> Now to get rid of the local RFI and it'd
>> be even better... Details, details.
>>
>> Have fun & 73,
>>
>> Gary
>> KA1J
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 15:20:57 -0500
>> From: Mpridesti <mpridesti@yahoo.com>
>> To: Mike Fischer <mikebfischer@comcast.net>
>> Cc: topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest
>> Message-ID: <439BC575-D7C6-4C3C-8791-6E1C01ADB369@yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>
>> Would be interested in responses to this query as well. Am planning to
>> erect the 4 el Hi Z with 80 ft spacing in a forested area. Trees are a mix
>> of hard and soft wood. Average heights are 70 ft.
>>
>> Gut feel is zero impact. Have 4 SQ for TX on both 160 and 80 in woods and
>> seem to work just fine.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mark, K1RX
>>
>>
>> > On Feb 18, 2019, at 2:56 PM, Mike Fischer <mikebfischer@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi all, newb to the topband 160 reflector here so thank you for any
>> coaching or corrections on protocol?
>> >
>> > I live on a heavily forested (douglas firs - almost all of which are
>> 100?+) piece of land.
>> >
>> > I have enough room left to put up either an SAL 30 or a 4sq of 20?
>> verts with 80? spacing. HiZ probably
>> >
>> > Problem is regardless of which I choose, there will be at least one or
>> two trees in the ?infield? and foliage around the edges.
>> >
>> > Any experience with the same or thoughts? Grateful for the coaching
>> please feel free to reply direct to mikebfischer@comcast.net
>> >
>> > 73
>> > K7XH
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPhone
>> > _________________
>> > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 15:05:06 -0600
>> From: Dennis Egan <egan.dennis88@gmail.com>
>> To: Topband reflector <topband@contesting.com>
>> Subject: Topband: HQ9X 160/80/60m
>> Message-ID:
>> <
>> CAOskpJG-TRLwyEFJZrW2CGrVO6_h0fYApnQrj6REkgAtKH6n+w@mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>>
>> For those in JA and the Far East, I will be QRV Wed 2/20 from 0900z until
>> 1200z or so (local daylight).
>>
>> For those in Europe, Wed 2/20 I will be on from 0000z until 0600z.
>>
>> I will also be doing an entry in the CQ 160 SSB contest next weekend.
>>
>> I may be on other times, but I will make sure I am on those times.
>> Antenna
>> here is a dipole at 45ft, but it?s about 80ft above the ocean a half mile
>> away. It does seem to work pretty well.
>>
>> On 160/80, CQ only. On 60m, USB only.
>>
>> Dennis HQ9X
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 16:10:37 -0600
>> From: Dennis Egan <egan.dennis88@gmail.com>
>> To: Topband reflector <topband@contesting.com>
>> Subject: Topband: Fwd: HQ9X 160/80/60m CORRECTION
>> Message-ID:
>> <
>> CAOskpJGxOkVQ2N1auvMxguS4o1dAc-TZpYYJRv71HdPNdTKtiA@mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>>
>> The Schedule aimed for Europe takes place on THURSDAY Feb 21, from 0000z
>> until 0600z. For me, those hours are Wed local time.
>>
>> Sorry for the error.
>>
>> Dennis HQ9X
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message --------
>> From: Dennis Egan <egan.dennis88@gmail.com>
>> Date: Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 15:05
>> Subject: Topband: HQ9X 160/80/60m
>> To: Topband reflector <topband@contesting.com>
>>
>>
>> For those in JA and the Far East, I will be QRV Wed 2/20 from 0900z until
>> 1200z or so (local daylight).
>>
>> For those in Europe, Wed 2/20 I will be on from 0000z until 0600z.
>>
>> I will also be doing an entry in the CQ 160 SSB contest next weekend.
>>
>> I may be on other times, but I will make sure I am on those times.
>> Antenna
>> here is a dipole at 45ft, but it?s about 80ft above the ocean a half mile
>> away. It does seem to work pretty well.
>>
>> On 160/80, CQ only. On 60m, USB only.
>>
>> Dennis HQ9X
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 6
>> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 23:55:57 +0000
>> From: Lee STRAHAN <k7tjr@msn.com>
>> To: "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com>
>> Subject: Topband: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest
>> Message-ID:
>> <
>> MWHPR05MB2816450D34DEC8D6FD317510F5630@MWHPR05MB2816.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
>> >
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> Since the inception of the Hi-Z antenna products we have recommended
>> that the elements be distant from foliage by at least 5 feet clearance. We
>> have also recommended that tall trees be 10 feet away from the elements. We
>> have had customers install arrays literally among forests without their
>> reporting adverse effects on the array performance. With this one
>> exception. A high impedance array was installed on a small lot in Florida
>> where after a month or two of scientific experiments it was decided that
>> close Palm tree fronds were affecting this array installed around a house.
>> The experiments revealed a very high dielectric property which may be part
>> of the answer to the effect. They were trimmed back lessening the effect.
>> After many years I recall no instance where the arrays have reportedly been
>> affected by other types of trees near the elements. I have no knowledge of
>> the SAL-30 except for meeting KB7GF the designer at Dayton and
>> comparatively running the NEC model he published.
>>
>> Lee K7TJR
>> Hi-Z Antennas
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 7
>> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 19:01:25 -0500
>> From: "John Kaufmann" <john.kaufmann@verizon.net>
>> To: "'Mike Fischer'" <mikebfischer@comcast.net>,
>> <topband@contesting.com>
>> Subject: Re: Topband: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest
>> Message-ID: <007c01d4c7e6$42120630$c6361290$@verizon.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>>
>> I have an 8-circle array in the woods. The tallest trees in my area are
>> about 60-70 feet, so your trees might be larger and denser than mine.
>> However, my system works very well, judging by the fact that its pattern
>> seems to match very closely the theoretical pattern for this array. In
>> other words, I seriously doubt that the trees are detuning or degrading my
>> array in any significant way. Some people believe that trees and foliage
>> introduce attenuation, even on 160 meters, but as long as the attenuation
>> is the same for every element in the array, it is of no consequence because
>> these short verticals are already very inefficient. I do try to keep the
>> verticals a few feet clear of big trees and foliage, and periodically I
>> trim away foliage that grows in around them.
>>
>> 73, John W1FV
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Mike
>> Fischer
>> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 2:56 PM
>> To: topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Topband: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest
>>
>> Hi all, newb to the topband 160 reflector here so thank you for any
>> coaching or corrections on protocol?
>>
>> I live on a heavily forested (douglas firs - almost all of which are
>> 100?+) piece of land.
>>
>> I have enough room left to put up either an SAL 30 or a 4sq of 20? verts
>> with 80? spacing. HiZ probably
>>
>> Problem is regardless of which I choose, there will be at least one or
>> two trees in the ?infield? and foliage around the edges.
>>
>> Any experience with the same or thoughts? Grateful for the coaching
>> please feel free to reply direct to mikebfischer@comcast.net
>>
>> 73
>> K7XH
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 8
>> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 19:44:25 -0500
>> From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
>> To: topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest
>> Message-ID: <6fae1eb4-9467-ff3f-5a62-9d12a87e76df@subich.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>>
>>
>> > Any experience with the same or thoughts?
>>
>> I would recommend looking into the YCCC "9 circle" (or "5 square")
>> array. Even though the kits are no longer available boards appear
>> to be available from the PI4CC group.
>>
>> The vertical arrays are less susceptible to wildlife damage than
>> the SAL (due to the low horizontal wire of the SAL) and provide
>> a higher signal level (before the preamp).
>>
>> I like the YCCC design because it has a cleaner pattern than the
>> 4 square (the center element is not "split" and thus does not
>> cause a spurious sidelobe response). Further, the "9 circle"
>> version provides 45 degree pattern selection (vs. 90 degrees for
>> the 4 square) and if 90 degree steps are acceptable, the 5 square
>> version provides the higher RDF in the same space (60' diagonal
>> square).
>>
>> As long as you keep the verticals (or the ends of the SAL) 10 - 15'
>> or so from tree trunks and keep the "brush' out of the array any
>> degradation should be minimal (mostly as additional losses) with
>> any of the antenna designs.
>>
>> If you are comfortable with NEC (antenna modelling), I urge you to
>> run the models of all three designs and make your own choice. Based
>> on the models, the SAL appear to be "unstable" and more prone to
>> environmental factors that the "amplified" vertical arrays.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
>> On 2019-02-18 2:56 PM, Mike Fischer wrote:
>> > Hi all, newb to the topband 160 reflector here so thank you for any
>> coaching or corrections on protocol?
>> >
>> > I live on a heavily forested (douglas firs - almost all of which are
>> 100?+) piece of land.
>> >
>> > I have enough room left to put up either an SAL 30 or a 4sq of 20?
>> verts with 80? spacing. HiZ probably
>> >
>> > Problem is regardless of which I choose, there will be at least one or
>> two trees in the ?infield? and foliage around the edges.
>> >
>> > Any experience with the same or thoughts? Grateful for the coaching
>> please feel free to reply direct to mikebfischer@comcast.net
>> >
>> > 73
>> > K7XH
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 9
>> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 04:15:05 +0000
>> From: Lee STRAHAN <k7tjr@msn.com>
>> To: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>, "topband@contesting.com"
>> <topband@contesting.com>
>> Subject: Re: Topband: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest
>> Message-ID:
>> <
>> MWHPR05MB2816C2307BEA28AA64D2726AF57C0@MWHPR05MB2816.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
>> >
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Joe and all,
>> Looking at the YCCC plots show all back lobes on 160 meters to be right
>> at 20 dB down. The Hi-Z 4-square as shipped has only 2 side lobes and both
>> are at 20 dB down with a notch directly off the back at usual 30+ dB down.
>> Its true there are plots around that show the -13 dB side lobes on the
>> 4-square which is a special phase delay to maximize the RDF another 0.1 dB
>> or so.
>> In addition, the 4-square suffers NO degradation in pattern and
>> produces the same F/B and RDF on 80 meters as it does on 160. The YCCC is
>> degraded on 80m. If the 4-square is built on a 60 foot side dimension
>> instead of the usual 80 feet there is less than 1/10 reduction in RDF on
>> 160 and the nearly same 160 meter performance is also available on 40
>> meters as well.
>> There is one fact that remains. Having any receiving antenna that
>> works is always better than none at all. Compromised or not. The only
>> indicator of performance in the long run is smiles behind the dial. Hope
>> you, K7XH get lots of private messages to help you with your choice as
>> well. I am thinking your trees are a non-issue.
>>
>> Lee K7TJR
>> Hi-Z Antennas
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Any experience with the same or thoughts?
>>
>> I would recommend looking into the YCCC "9 circle" (or "5 square")
>> array. Even though the kits are no longer available boards appear to be
>> available from the PI4CC group.
>>
>> The vertical arrays are less susceptible to wildlife damage than the SAL
>> (due to the low horizontal wire of the SAL) and provide a higher signal
>> level (before the preamp).
>>
>> I like the YCCC design because it has a cleaner pattern than the
>> 4 square (the center element is not "split" and thus does not cause a
>> spurious sidelobe response). Further, the "9 circle"
>> version provides 45 degree pattern selection (vs. 90 degrees for the 4
>> square) and if 90 degree steps are acceptable, the 5 square version
>> provides the higher RDF in the same space (60' diagonal square).
>>
>> As long as you keep the verticals (or the ends of the SAL) 10 - 15'
>> or so from tree trunks and keep the "brush' out of the array any
>> degradation should be minimal (mostly as additional losses) with any of the
>> antenna designs.
>>
>> If you are comfortable with NEC (antenna modelling), I urge you to run
>> the models of all three designs and make your own choice. Based on the
>> models, the SAL appear to be "unstable" and more prone to environmental
>> factors that the "amplified" vertical arrays.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
>> On 2019-02-18 2:56 PM, Mike Fischer wrote:
>> > Hi all, newb to the topband 160 reflector here so thank you for any
>> > coaching or corrections on protocol?
>> >
>> > I live on a heavily forested (douglas firs - almost all of which are
>> 100?+) piece of land.
>> >
>> > I have enough room left to put up either an SAL 30 or a 4sq of 20?
>> > verts with 80? spacing. HiZ probably
>> >
>> > Problem is regardless of which I choose, there will be at least one or
>> two trees in the ?infield? and foliage around the edges.
>> >
>> > Any experience with the same or thoughts? Grateful for the coaching
>> > please feel free to reply direct to mikebfischer@comcast.net
>> >
>> > 73
>> > K7XH
>> >
>>
>>
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 10
>> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 04:58:58 +0000 (UTC)
>> From: <cqtestk4xs@aol.com>
>> To: topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest
>> Message-ID: <1150619910.1359652.1550552338095@mail.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>
>> I have? had both.
>> First, the SAL-30 is currently being used at my station and hears
>> considerably better than my 160 vertical.? It exhibits F/B somewhere around
>> 15-20 dBs on 160.? It is located about 100 ft from the nearest antenna (the
>> westernmost vertical of my 4 sq for 80), about 150 feet from my tower and
>> 175 ft from my 160 vertical.? Other than that it is in the clear...no trees
>> at all.? I am totally satisfied with its performance.? It hears about the
>> same as my 4 sq for 80, and down from my 4 el at 85 ft for 40.? Although
>> sometimes it does hear better on 40 and 80, but not often.
>> In FL I had a Hi-Z array but I always felt it was compromised.? Why?? It
>> was in the back part of my lot where several elements were very close to
>> the trees.? One element was almost touching the trees...big oaks with lots
>> of Spanish moss.? I also had a run of TV cable of 550 ft to it.? This is
>> not to bad mouth the antenna system, I just felt I had put it in the wrong
>> part of the yard and it might have performed better with less of a run and
>> further away from the trees.
>> I sold the station about a year after I bought the antenna so I never
>> moved the system.
>> By the way, 160 was hopping over the weekend out here in the
>> ARRLDX....331 stations and many were VERY LOUD.
>> Bill K4XS/KH7B/KH7XS
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lee STRAHAN <k7tjr@msn.com>
>> To: Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@subich.com>; topband@contesting.com <
>> topband@contesting.com>
>> Sent: Tue, Feb 19, 2019 4:15 am
>> Subject: Re: Topband: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest
>>
>> ? Joe and all,
>> ? Looking at the YCCC plots show all back lobes on 160 meters to be right
>> at 20 dB down. The Hi-Z 4-square as shipped has only 2 side lobes and both
>> are at 20 dB down with a notch directly off the back at usual 30+ dB down.
>> Its true there are plots around that show the -13 dB side lobes on the
>> 4-square which is a special phase delay to maximize the RDF another 0.1 dB
>> or so.
>> ? In addition, the 4-square suffers NO degradation in pattern and
>> produces the same F/B and RDF on 80 meters as it does on 160. The YCCC is
>> degraded on 80m. If the 4-square is built on a 60 foot side dimension
>> instead of the usual 80 feet there is less than 1/10 reduction in RDF on
>> 160 and the nearly same 160 meter performance is also available on 40
>> meters as well.
>> ? ? There is one fact that remains. Having any receiving antenna that
>> works is always better than none at all. Compromised or not. The only
>> indicator of performance in the long run is smiles behind the dial. Hope
>> you, K7XH get lots of private messages to help you with your choice as
>> well. I am thinking your trees are a non-issue.
>>
>> Lee? K7TJR
>> Hi-Z Antennas
>>
>>
>> ? ?
>>
>>
>> > Any experience with the same or? thoughts?
>>
>> I would recommend looking into the YCCC "9 circle" (or "5 square")
>> array.? Even though the kits are no longer available boards appear to be
>> available from the PI4CC group.
>>
>> The vertical arrays are less susceptible to wildlife damage than the SAL
>> (due to the low horizontal wire of the SAL) and provide a higher signal
>> level (before the preamp).
>>
>> I like the YCCC design because it has a cleaner pattern than the
>> 4 square (the center element is not "split" and thus does not cause a
>> spurious sidelobe response).? Further, the "9 circle"
>> version provides 45 degree pattern selection (vs. 90 degrees for the 4
>> square) and if 90 degree steps are acceptable, the 5 square version
>> provides the higher RDF in the same space (60' diagonal square).
>>
>> As long as you keep the verticals (or the ends of the SAL) 10 - 15'
>> or so from tree trunks and keep the "brush' out of the array any
>> degradation should be minimal (mostly as additional losses) with any of the
>> antenna designs.
>>
>> If you are comfortable with NEC (antenna modelling), I urge you to run
>> the models of all three designs and make your own choice.? Based on the
>> models, the SAL appear to be "unstable" and more prone to environmental
>> factors that the "amplified" vertical arrays.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ? ? ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
>> On 2019-02-18 2:56 PM, Mike Fischer wrote:
>> > Hi all, newb to the topband 160 reflector here so thank you for any
>> > coaching or corrections on protocol?
>> >
>> > I live on a heavily forested (douglas firs - almost all of which are
>> 100?+) piece of land.
>> >
>> > I have enough room left to put up either an SAL 30 or a? 4sq of 20?
>> > verts with 80? spacing. HiZ probably
>> >
>> > Problem is regardless of which I choose, there will be at least one or
>> two trees in the ?infield? and foliage around the edges.
>> >
>> > Any experience with the same or? thoughts? Grateful for the coaching
>> > please feel free to reply direct to? mikebfischer@comcast.net
>> >
>> > 73
>> > K7XH
>> >
>>
>>
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 11
>> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 06:05:40 -0500
>> From: "John Harden, D.M.D." <jhdmd@bellsouth.net>
>> To: cqtestk4xs@aol.com, topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest
>> Message-ID: <8466485c-882a-af97-73b0-185e58e0536f@bellsouth.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>>
>> My Hi-Z 8 is located in a flood plain down the hill and across the creek
>> in a large city lot here in Atlanta. Being there it is below and away
>> from most noise sources. It has provided consistent good results on 80
>> and 160. Due to protective upgrades by Lee it is not as sensitive to
>> lightening as it once was. My lot size is one acre which is large in?
>> the City of Atlanta.
>>
>> It works nicely since most polarization appears to be vertical here.
>> V84SAA was storming in here from the NW on 80 CW one morning.
>> Unfortunately I was not able to copy them on 160. I could not copy them
>> on 160 on the Waller Flag on a 40 foot boom at 95 feet either.
>>
>> Propagation here has not been the best this season. However I did pick u
>> several new ones.
>>
>> The difference here now is largely attributable to the IC-7610 which has
>> an inherent and ERIE quietness being an SDR. I hear many stations I
>> cannot copy on my K-3 though the K3 is an excellent receiver.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> John, W4NU
>>
>> Atlanta, GA
>>
>> (K4JAG 1959 to 1998)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2/18/2019 11:58 PM, cqtestk4xs--- via Topband wrote:
>> > I have? had both.
>> > First, the SAL-30 is currently being used at my station and hears
>> considerably better than my 160 vertical.? It exhibits F/B somewhere around
>> 15-20 dBs on 160.? It is located about 100 ft from the nearest antenna (the
>> westernmost vertical of my 4 sq for 80), about 150 feet from my tower and
>> 175 ft from my 160 vertical.? Other than that it is in the clear...no trees
>> at all.? I am totally satisfied with its performance.? It hears about the
>> same as my 4 sq for 80, and down from my 4 el at 85 ft for 40.? Although
>> sometimes it does hear better on 40 and 80, but not often.
>> > In FL I had a Hi-Z array but I always felt it was compromised.? Why??
>> It was in the back part of my lot where several elements were very close to
>> the trees.? One element was almost touching the trees...big oaks with lots
>> of Spanish moss.? I also had a run of TV cable of 550 ft to it.? This is
>> not to bad mouth the antenna system, I just felt I had put it in the wrong
>> part of the yard and it might have performed better with less of a run and
>> further away from the trees.
>> > I sold the station about a year after I bought the antenna so I never
>> moved the system.
>> > By the way, 160 was hopping over the weekend out here in the
>> ARRLDX....331 stations and many were VERY LOUD.
>> > Bill K4XS/KH7B/KH7XS
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Lee STRAHAN <k7tjr@msn.com>
>> > To: Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@subich.com>; topband@contesting.com <
>> topband@contesting.com>
>> > Sent: Tue, Feb 19, 2019 4:15 am
>> > Subject: Re: Topband: 4sq vs SAL 30 Mkii in a forest
>> >
>> > ? Joe and all,
>> > ? Looking at the YCCC plots show all back lobes on 160 meters to be
>> right at 20 dB down. The Hi-Z 4-square as shipped has only 2 side lobes and
>> both are at 20 dB down with a notch directly off the back at usual 30+ dB
>> down. Its true there are plots around that show the -13 dB side lobes on
>> the 4-square which is a special phase delay to maximize the RDF another 0.1
>> dB or so.
>> > ? In addition, the 4-square suffers NO degradation in pattern and
>> produces the same F/B and RDF on 80 meters as it does on 160. The YCCC is
>> degraded on 80m. If the 4-square is built on a 60 foot side dimension
>> instead of the usual 80 feet there is less than 1/10 reduction in RDF on
>> 160 and the nearly same 160 meter performance is also available on 40
>> meters as well.
>> > ? ? There is one fact that remains. Having any receiving antenna that
>> works is always better than none at all. Compromised or not. The only
>> indicator of performance in the long run is smiles behind the dial. Hope
>> you, K7XH get lots of private messages to help you with your choice as
>> well. I am thinking your trees are a non-issue.
>> >
>> > Lee? K7TJR
>> > Hi-Z Antennas
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > Any experience with the same or? thoughts?
>> >
>> > I would recommend looking into the YCCC "9 circle" (or "5 square")
>> array.? Even though the kits are no longer available boards appear to be
>> available from the PI4CC group.
>> >
>> > The vertical arrays are less susceptible to wildlife damage than the
>> SAL (due to the low horizontal wire of the SAL) and provide a higher signal
>> level (before the preamp).
>> >
>> > I like the YCCC design because it has a cleaner pattern than the
>> > 4 square (the center element is not "split" and thus does not cause a
>> spurious sidelobe response).? Further, the "9 circle"
>> > version provides 45 degree pattern selection (vs. 90 degrees for the 4
>> square) and if 90 degree steps are acceptable, the 5 square version
>> provides the higher RDF in the same space (60' diagonal square).
>> >
>> > As long as you keep the verticals (or the ends of the SAL) 10 - 15'
>> > or so from tree trunks and keep the "brush' out of the array any
>> degradation should be minimal (mostly as additional losses) with any of the
>> antenna designs.
>> >
>> > If you are comfortable with NEC (antenna modelling), I urge you to run
>> the models of all three designs and make your own choice.? Based on the
>> models, the SAL appear to be "unstable" and more prone to environmental
>> factors that the "amplified" vertical arrays.
>> >
>> > 73,
>> >
>> > ? ? ... Joe, W4TV
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2019-02-18 2:56 PM, Mike Fischer wrote:
>> >> Hi all, newb to the topband 160 reflector here so thank you for any
>> >> coaching or corrections on protocol?
>> >>
>> >> I live on a heavily forested (douglas firs - almost all of which are
>> 100?+) piece of land.
>> >>
>> >> I have enough room left to put up either an SAL 30 or a? 4sq of 20?
>> >> verts with 80? spacing. HiZ probably
>> >>
>> >> Problem is regardless of which I choose, there will be at least one or
>> two trees in the ?infield? and foliage around the edges.
>> >>
>> >> Any experience with the same or? thoughts? Grateful for the coaching
>> >> please feel free to reply direct to? mikebfischer@comcast.net
>> >>
>> >> 73
>> >> K7XH
>> >>
>> >
>> > _________________
>> > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>> > _________________
>> > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>> > _________________
>> > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Topband mailing list
>> Topband@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of Topband Digest, Vol 194, Issue 21
>> ****************************************
>>
>
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
|